You might notice some differences with this edition of the report. Think of it as our “practice what we preach” pivot. Not only have we redesigned the look and feel with the support of Keen as Mustard to a design that we think supports the goal of visual storytelling better, but we also made the decision to shift the structure of the survey. Starting with this iteration, our Q1-Q2 Report tracks technology adoption, financial outlook, and the most innovative companies. The bulk of the study is dedicated to new topics such as understanding the evolving “Day in the Life” of research professionals, from the work they do to the tools they use to do it, as well as views on the future of the industry.

The Q3-Q4 edition will remain the primary tracking instrument on topics such as techniques used, perceptions on change, emerging methods, and other trends.

We have also continued our quest to shorten the survey itself, increase engagement via design, and incorporate a higher proportion of verbatim responses to allow for more richness and depth within the responses. To accomplish this, we’ve utilized new tools such as automated probing of open-ends via Quester, and advanced text analytics and contextual analysis through Decooda to deliver more value through verbatims. You will see less charts and more quotes, which lends to deeper insights into our changing industry and GRIT respondents.

One of our most popular topics is covered extensively herein; we showcase the GRIT Top 50 supplier companies perceived to be most innovative and dive deeper into what makes a company truly innovative. For the first time, we also explore the most innovative client-side organizations. These sections are far more than brand trackers— they offer a window into what constitutes innovation in this industry with some surprising results.

We continue our series of thought-provoking commentaries by various players in the industry. These expanded views on the implications of various findings provide a deeper context for the report’s results.

GreenBook partners with a variety of international entities to make the GRIT Report ever more representative of the industry on a worldwide level. While this still proves to be a challenge in some regions, we are committed and constantly inching closer to our goal.

9 responses to “The Q1/Q2 2015 GRIT Report Is Here!”

Leonard a great report as always. One thing I did notice in this years report is an apparent disconnect between what research buyers are using and what the research community is offering. And to be blunt the disconnect seems to be across a number of the technology areas the report seems to be eulogizing.

Behavioural economics, one of BrainJuicer’s areas of excellence has a significant disconnect, with research companies offering the service at 29% and Buyers using it at only 17%. Mobile ethnography, mobile qualitative and micro-surveys also show that same direction, more offering and less using. In fact sometimes there is a reverse pattern where Buyers claim usage higher than the incidence the methodology is offered by the research community – social media and big data analytics.

Two other interesting observations. First of these is that most of the neuroscience tools, which seem to be the current buzz, appear to have both low adoption and low client side usage, suggesting either low relevance or it’s early in the game. The other more fundamental difference is that now older and more accepted tools like mobile surveys and web-based interviewing seem to have much lower buy side support than I would have expected.

What are we looking at here? Is it indeed early days, or is this disconnect a sign that clients are not really seeing these tools as breakthrough solutions? Are clients always behind the curve where research technologies are concerned? A worrying comment came from one of my colleagues in an area of neuroscience outside of market research who said to me that their end customers are moving away from technology lead solutions, finding them less than successful against the hyperbola that marked their early introduction. Whither this whole technology thing in market research? Just askin …

1.: Clients don’t care about methodology-driven tech (mobile, micro, etc…) since it’s the job of the supplier to recommend the best approach to answer the business issue, therefor suppliers are focusing on those things.
2.: Clients are not automatically going to MR suppliers for Social and Big Data (why should they?), which are not methods but rather tactical utilizations of technology that have an impact across their organization outside of MR.
3.: Unless something can pass the “cheaper, faster, better” trifecta, it stays niche. Neuro has been hogtied by limits in “cheaper/faster”. I think that will change via facial scanning and wearables, but it’s still early.

Tech will continue to disrupt, but clients are going to focus on impact first, cost and speed next and that is the lens all trends should be viewed through.

Leonard you nailed it. That trifecta is forever going to be embedded in my mind. “Cheap, Faster and Better”. It does explain why panel and mobile technologies have been the major growth areas in the last decade, despite a lot of methodological concerns. Excellent study on the graphics and presentation front too Leonard!